HYDROGEN EMBRITTLEMENT High Strength

Steels Achilles Heel

Published on June 14, 2013 by Rob in News


Scanning electron microscopy of the fracture is an essential element of the failure analysis of this
Grade 8 High Strength fastener.
THE PHENOMENON
Sudden brittle fractures in high strength steels resulting from hydrogen embrittlement represent a
dangerous threat to industry. Not only are there the usual issues of cost such as warranty claims,
but in cases of personal injury or property damage, liability points clearly and directly at the
manufacturer. This is because hydrogen embrittlement is usually the result of deficient procedures
in the manufacturing process.
Well get into the why and how of hydrogen embrittlement in the next posting in two weeks. For now
though, lets just discuss some of the characteristics of this type of failure. Perhaps youll recognize
some of these from fractures youve encountered, but didnt realize at the time that hydrogen was
the cause.
Hydrogen embrittlement reduces ductility, often to the point where metals behave like ceramics.
Consequently, their resistance to fatigue fracture, their fatigue strength, is significantly reduced as
well. Fracture toughness, the ability of a metal to resist fracture growth when a small crack is
present, is also dramatically reduced. Brittle fracture due to hydrogen embrittlement occurs without
any visible distortion or other warning signs and can happen within hours of manufacture or after
years in service. Hydrogen embrittlement failures have even been observed in unassembled parts
in inventory, a phenomenon known as shelf popping.
Generally, the higher the strength of the steel, the more at risk it is to hydrogen embrittlement and
the more vulnerable it is to lower levels of hydrogen. Embrittlement at levels of 10 parts per million
and less are not uncommon. Some research suggests this relationship is exponential. In other
words, doubling the strength of the steel, quadruples its susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement.
Although hydrogen embrittlement occurs in many different metal alloys, high strength steel appears
to be the most sensitive, is the most widely used, and accounts for the largest number of hydrogen
embrittlement failures. A professionally conducted failure analysis can definitely recognize hydrogen
embrittlement when present, what caused it, and how to prevent it.
In our next post we will discuss the phenomenon of hydrogen embrittlement from a metallurgical
perspective what actually occurs, on a microscopic scale that causes hydrogen embrittlement?


Expanded grain boundaries produced during a hydrogen embrittlement failure are clearly visible in
this image taken using a scanning electron microscope.

THE METALLURGICAL PHENOMENON
In our last post on Hydrogen Embrittlement and its effects on high strength steel we discussed the
characteristics of hydrogen embrittlement failures and some of the types of material that are
affected. In this post, we will describe how hydrogen embrittlement occurs, from a microscopic and
metallurgical perspective.
Hydrogen atoms are the smallest of any element. So small, that they easily travel between iron
atoms in steel and other ferrous alloys. Structurally, metals are composed of multi-atom crystals, or
grains, that are analogous to the cells that make up biological organisms. Typically, the grains in
metals are microscopic and the space between the grains, called the grain boundaries, is virtually
immeasurable. But in comparison to the size of a hydrogen atom, the grain boundaries are gapping
canyons.
Under unfavorable conditions individual hydrogen atoms can enter these grain boundaries and
move, or diffuse, into a metal component. Once absorbed in this manner, hydrogen atoms are
attracted to microscopic crystal defects, or misalignments, where there is slightly more space
between grains. They are also attracted to areas under tensile stresses that result in a very slight
increase in the space between grains from the opposing pull of the stress. A typical example of
this condition is a bolt that has been tightened.
As more hydrogen atoms accumulate at these areas, they combine to form hydrogen molecules.
Although composed of two hydrogen atoms, a hydrogen molecule (H
2
) is significantly larger than
two individual hydrogen atoms. This produces pressure between grains, expanding the size of the
defect or grain boundary interface, attracting more hydrogen atoms and accelerating the process.
This cycle produces a raising tensile stress inside the component which eventually results in a
micro-crack. These micro-cracks grow rapidly and simultaneously at numerous locations within the
part, reducing the actual intact load bearing cross section by as much as 10-20%.
In order for hydrogen embrittlement to occur, three conditions must coincide:
1. The part must have a tensile strength in excess off approximately 130,000 psi. This
generally corresponds to a hardness of Rockwell C 35.
2. The part must be in contact with a source of hydrogen. This may occur during manufacture,
in service, or both.
3. The part must be subjected to a tensile stress.
This last condition can be deceptive because parts do not need to be assembled or in service to be
under tensile stress. Residual internal stresses from casting, forging, welding and other
manufacturing processes are significant and, in fact, are probably the root cause of most hydrogen
embrittlement failures. Heat treating to raise strength levels above 130,000 psi induces substantial
levels of residual stress. The disturbing phenomenon of shelf popping, unassembled parts
cracking in storage or inventory with an audible pop, results from hydrogen embrittlement resulting
from residual stress.
Since the hydrogen is absorbed through the grain boundaries, hydrogen embrittlement cracking is
primarily intergranular (fracture at the grain boundary) rather than transgranular (fracture through
the grains) as in some other forms of brittle cracking.
In our next post, we will discuss potential sources of atomic hydrogen and conditions that make
components susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement.



Acid cleaning of this transmission input shaft during manufacture resulted in failure by hydrogen
embrittlement.
In our last post we discussed the metallurgical aspects of hydrogen embrittlement what actually
occurs that results in hydrogen absorption in metals and how it affects their material properties. In
this post we will look at the potential sources of hydrogen, what materials are susceptible to
hydrogen embrittlement, and why.
HYDROGEN SOURCES
One of the challenges in predicting and preventing hydrogen embrittlement is the wide range of
available sources of hydrogen, in both the manufacturing and the service environments.
Thermal dissociation of hydrogen from water is a prime source of hydrogen in manufacturing
processes. This can occur in the initial steel making process, as well as subsequent casting or
forging operations. Hydrogen can also be absorbed during grinding, abrasive blasting or tumbling,
soldering, brazing and welding. At these stages, hydrogen can be dissociated directly from high
dew point atmosphere, or from water absorbed in process related media, such as welding electrode
flux coatings, abrasive grinding wheels and fine absorbent dust in blasting and tumbling media.
Acid cleaning or pickling, and electro-plating, however, are the most common source of hydrogen in
manufacturing. Hydrogen containing acids used in these operations invariably infuse susceptible
parts with atomic hydrogen.
Service related sources of hydrogen include incidental contact with hydrogen containing acids or
cleaning solutions, or absorption from hydrogen containing product that is being processed, such as
chemicals, food, or even waste water.
The most common source of hydrogen in service by far, however, is corrosion. Corrosion can also
act as a source of hydrogen in the manufacturing process as well. Rusted ingots and scrap used in
casting melts, welding on parts that have corroded, and heat treating corroded parts, are potential
sources of absorbed hydrogen, particularly when exposed to elevated temperatures which increase
the mobility of hydrogen atoms.
SUSCEPTIBLE MATERIALS
High strength steels with tensile strengths above 130,000 psi and a hardness of Rockwell C35 or
greater are the most prone to hydrogen embrittlement. Steels below these tensile and hardness
levels are generally immune to hydrogen embrittlement. Why?
Increased hardness, most commonly by heat treating, is accompanied by a corresponding
decrease in ductility. In simple terms, ductility is the ability of a material to deform under stress
rather than crack or fracture. When hydrogen atoms combine into molecules in a steel that exceeds
the tensile strength and hardness thresholds, the steel cracks under the stress increase. But if the
tensile and hardness levels are below the critical threshold, the higher degree of ductility allows the
steel to deform, absorbing and redistributing the stress increase, rather than cracking.
Susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement increases in alloy steels with heat treatment to higher
strength. The strength/susceptibility relationship, in fact, approaches exponential levels. In other
words, doubling the strength through heat treating, quadruples the steels susceptibility to hydrogen
embrittlement.
Identifying and sorting embrittled parts from good components before they fail is virtually
impossible. The detection limit of hydrogen by chemical analysis is generally well above the 5 to 10
ppm level at which embrittlement has been shown to occur. Even if such detection capability was
available, hydrogen tends to concentrate at specific locations within the part. This leaves the
majority of the part with low or undetectable hydrogen levels. Chemical analysis of parts after
failure, to determine if hydrogen embrittlement was the cause, is also not viable since the hydrogen
diffuses from the part after fracture.
Since most hydrogen embrittlement results from hydrogen absorbed during the manufacturing
process, parts which are batch processed are usually either all embrittled or all good. The failure
of one part from a batch, therefore, is usually a good indication that others from the same batch
will fail.



Grade 8 fastener bolt hydrogen embrittlement failure
In the first three parts of this series we discussed the physical and metallurgical aspects of
hydrogen embrittlement. An understanding of how the phenomenon occurs is the foundation of the
ultimate question how can hydrogen embrittlement be prevented.
PREVENTION
The two critical points at which most hydrogen embrittlement failures can be prevented are at the
design stage and during the manufacturing process. Designers with limited materials engineering
exposure may not realize the implications of the materials and manufacturing processes they call
for in their drawing specifications. As with other failure types, hydrogen embrittlement failures can
inadvertently be designed into a part.
On the manufacturing side, avoiding the use of reducing acids where possible removes an
abundant source of hydrogen from potential exposure to a part. Pickling, etching and electroplating
are common manufacturing processes in which acid exposure occurs. Because it is so widely used,
electroplating requires particular attention. Minimizing plating time and maximizing current density
will generally reduce the volume of absorbed hydrogen. However, consideration of electroless
plating or vapor deposition as an alternative eliminates the possibility of hydrogen absorption from
the coating process altogether.
Protecting components that will be heat treated or welded from corrosion, or cleaning them prior to
these processes will avoid hydrogen introduction by these routes. It is also critical that welding rods
are stored in a manner which prevents the absorption of moisture into their flux coating. Any
process associated with elevated temperatures will also increase the mobility and absorption of
hydrogen, increasing the potential for hydrogen embrittlement.
HYDROGEN MANAGEMENT
Despite the most stringent precautions, processing requirements will sometimes introduce hydrogen
into parts that are at or above the tensile strength and hardness thresholds at which hydrogen
embrittlement can occur. Fortunately, there is a procedure that will effectively remove absorbed
hydrogen. This is an oven heating process, referred to as baking, that is performed within the
following parameters:
1. Parts must be baked within 4 hours of hydrogen exposure. The sooner, the better.
2. Parts must be baked at a minimum of 400 F.
3. Parts must be held at 400 F for a minimum of 4 hours. Longer may be required depending
on part size.
To be effective, these time and temperature parameters must be strictly followed. Short-cuts or
delays will dramatically reduce the effectiveness of baking in removing absorbed hydrogen. For
example, twice as much hydrogen will be baked out at 400 F versus 350F, and doubling the bake
time doubles the amount of hydrogen that is baked out.
The sooner baking begins after exposure to hydrogen, the better. The 4 hour window is a
maximum. Note that baking must be performed within 4 hours of each hydrogen exposure. For
example, within 4 hours of pickling, AND within 4 hours of subsequent plating. No amount of baking
will salvage embrittled parts if these time and temperature parameters have not been met.
A final word of caution. A 30 year analysis of hydrogen embrittlement failures in the aircraft industry
found that over 70% resulted from improper baking procedures.
In the next, and final, part of the series well talk briefly about the history of hydrogen
embrittlement, and why its a relatively recent phenomenon.

A LITTLE HISTORY
Hydrogen embrittlement is a relatively recent phenomenon. With a few exceptions, failures by this
mode did not occur prior to the middle of the last century. In a sense, the genesis of hydrogen
embrittlement was the jet engine.
In the late 1940s a revolution was underway in aviation. Jet propulsion was rapidly replacing the
old piston engine driven propeller technology and aircraft performance began to exceed levels that
had been considered physically impossible just ten years earlier. The dramatic increase in power
provided by jet propulsion demanded airframes that could withstand the resulting higher loading.
That increase in performance, and aviations never-ending quest for weight reduction, only added to
the demands placed on existing materials. The result was a push for higher strength alloys from
which stronger and lighter components could be made.
Low alloy steels such as 4130 had been used in
aviation in the past. However, these materials were typically used in the normalized heat treated
condition, at tensile strengths in the 90,000 to 120,000 psi range well below levels susceptible to
hydrogen embrittlement. In response to demands for more strength, radical heat treatments
resulting in tensile strengths approaching 200,000 psi were applied to 4130 and other anemic low
alloy steels. Some of the first hydrogen embrittlement failures appeared in this material, though the
cause was not initially recognized.
Enhanced low alloy steels, such as 4140 and 4340 were used in response to these failures, and the
cycle was repeated, with the demand for more performance from smaller components resulting in
processing to ever higher tensile strength levels.
One of the unfortunate consequences of increasing the strength of low alloy steels is a
corresponding reduction in corrosion resistance. To combat increased corrosion in service, a variety
of electroplated coatings, such as chromium, nickel and cadmium, were applied.
With a potent source of hydrogen now available from the plating baths used to protect the new high
strength alloys, a dramatic increase in hydrogen embrittlement failures occurred in both the
aerospace industry and other industries to which the new materials technology had filtered down.
Once hydrogen had been identified as the Achilles heel of these materials, the prevention strategies
described in part four of this series were developed.

Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 1 A Railroad
Disaster Led to the Discovery of Fatigue Failure
Published on April 3, 2014 by Rob in News

On May 11
th
, 1842 the first major railroad disaster in
history set off a chain of events which led to the discovery of the phenomenon that we now know as
fatigue failure.
The Paris Versailles Express, hurtling down the tracks at the then astounding speed of 50 miles
per hour, exploded in flames when the drive axle on the lead locomotive broke, digging its front end
into the railbed. The second locomotive in the tandem drive set smashed into the firebox of the lead
engine along with the first three cars, killing 57 passengers outright and injuring over a hundred
more. It was the 1800s equivalent of a jumbo jet crash, and the great scientific minds of the day
focused their collective wisdom on perhaps the first major failure analysis in history. The result of
their decade long investigation produced the beginnings of our understanding of fatigue.
Fatigue is the most common type of fracture in engineered components. Fatigue fractures are also
particularly dangerous because they can occur under normal service conditions, with no warning
that a progressively growing crack is developing until the final catastrophic failure. The component,
whether its the outer aluminum skin of a commercial jet or a simple tubular chair leg, often appears
to be perfectly sound with no visible distortion to warn of impending failure.
A technical understanding of fatigue requires a comprehensive knowledge of metallurgy, physics,
and phenomena like plastic deformation, slip planes and dislocation theory. In fact, there are
several competing theories on exactly what happens at a microscopic level when a fatigue crack
initiates. But a practical understanding of the process is extremely beneficial and has direct
application to its prevention in service and the manufacturing environment.
To the non-technically inclined, the term fatigue suggests this type of failure is related to the age
of a component; that the material is tired. In fact, fatigue fracture can occur within hours of a
component going into service or, conversely, even highly stressed components can operate for
decades with no fatigue cracking or failure.
Fatigue fractures result from repeated, or cyclic, stresses. These stresses can take a variety of
forms, such as bending (in one direction), reverse bending (back and forth in two directions), torsion
(twisting in one or more axis) and rotation. Regardless of this variation in form, the stress on the
component at the initiation point of a fatigue fracture is always tensile stress. In other words, the
point of origin at which the fracture begins is being stretched apart, or pulled in opposite
directions. To illustrate this, visualize a tube which is being repeatedly bent in one direction. The
side of the tube that is concave when it is bent is being compressed. The side of the tube which is
convex is being stretched, or subjected to a tensile stress. This is the side on which a fatigue
crack will initiate.
Fatigue cracks initiate at stresses below the tensile strength of the material. Tensile strength
is the stress, or load, at which a material breaks when pulled in opposite directions. Each metal
alloy has a specific tensile strength, expressed as a numerical value, varying somewhat depending
on heat treatment and other processing operations. These values are widely available in
engineering reference manuals, typically expressed as pounds per square inch in American
references. The fact that fatigue cracks can initiate at stress levels below the tensile strength of a
material is difficult to explain. Theories on why this occurs suggest physical and structural changes
at the microscopic (0.0001 or less) area of crack initiation.
Fatigue is a progressive fracture mechanism. Once a fatigue crack initiates, it advances further
into the component with each stress cycle. This crack growth process continues as long as the
component is subjected to cyclic stress. Depending on the magnitude and frequency of the
stresses, the crack may grow over time frames ranging from hours to years. Eventually, the crack
advances to a point where the remaining intact cross section of the component cannot sustain the
next cyclic stress load the straw that breaks the camels back and complete fracture of the
component occurs.
In Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 2 we will discuss strategies to prevent fatigue initiation that
can be implemented at the design and manufacturing stages of a components life.

Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 2 Fatigue in the
Real World and Crack Initaition
Published on April 8, 2014 by Rob in News

Fatigue in the Real World
In the real world fatigue usually not always, but usually initiates at a location that acts as a
stress concentration, or stress riser. A component is most resistant to fracture when the stress is
evenly distributed over it. A stress riser disrupts this even distribution and concentrates the stress at
a geometric feature or reduction in the components area. Typical stress risers include holes, slots,
corners and radii, rough surface finish, welds, corrosion pits, cracks and microstructural defects
such as inclusions.
The exception to usually the cases where fatigue fractures initiate from component surfaces that
are free of stress risers typically result from one of two causes; under-design of the component, or
abusive service conditions.
Just as all materials have an ultimate tensile strength, they also have a fatigue strength,
sometimes called the fatigue limit or endurance limit. Once a component is subjected to cyclic
stresses that exceed this limit, fatigue fracture occurs, even though no stress riser is present.
Fatigue failures of this type are less common than fatigue failures initiating from stress risers.
Usually components are intentionally over-designed to deal with stresses several times greater than
those they would be subjected to in service as a safety margin.
Fatigue Crack Initiation The Critical Event
If the initiation stage can be prevented, fatigue fracture will not occur. It sounds obvious and
simple. Its not. Initiation is the most complex stage of fatigue fracture. A low magnitude load, which
would have no effect whatsoever on a component in a single application, can be devastating when
repeatedly applied in thousands or millions of cycles. The cumulative effect of these cyclic loads are
microscopic shifts in the materials structure which ultimately produce a dislocation at this scale
it is too small to be called a crack and the focal point of stress concentration is born. Vibration
harmonics, dampening of the system and the service environment further complicate the issue.
Collectively, these affects become difficult to predict in the design stage.
In Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 3 we will discuss fatigue prevention at the design stage of a
components life, with following entries focused on the manufacturing and service environments and
their relationship to fatigue failure.

Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 3 Confronting
Fatigue Attack and Defense
Published on April 15, 2014 by Rob in News

Confronting Fatigue Attack and Defense
From a practical standpoint, fatigue failures present a danger to you, the manufacturer, at three
points in a components life. These are the design stage, the manufacturing process, and the
service environment.
Design
The designer or design engineer is the first line of defense against fatigue failure. He or she cant
prevent failures originating in the manufacturing process or service environment, but the designer
lays the foundation of prevention.
In an ideal world, each design would be subjected to extensive stress calculations and fatigue
testing.In the real world this is rarely cost effective for non-critical components. Instead, accepted
and proven parameters are applied. These typically include safety margins which are more than
adequate. Typically, but not always. And even a common off the shelf fastener can take complex
products out of service if it fails.
A working understanding of material strengths and properties by the designer is optimal.
Unfortunately, that is a relatively rare combination of expertise. And although material strength and
property data is widely available, the effective application of this information is sometimes outside
the experience of the designer.
The job of the designer becomes even more challenging when the many potential variables
inherent in the manufacturing process are considered. Leaving aside the production of the raw
material at the mill the bar, plate and sheet manufacture of the designers envisioned
component may include a host of processes that he or would ideally be familiar with through which
the seeds of fatigue failure could potentially be introduced.
Computer Aided Design (CAD), Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and a variety of other computer
driven design and predictive technologies can greatly enhance the fatigue resistance of a
component at the design stage. But they cannot prevent fatigue failures. Thats because the next
two threats of fatigue failure are beyond the designers control.
In Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 4 we will discuss fatigue prevention at the manufacturing
stage of a components life.


Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 4 Confronting
Fatigue The Manufacturing Stage
Published on April 24, 2014 by Rob in News

Confronting Fatigue Attack and Defense
From a practical standpoint, fatigue failures present a danger to you, the manufacturer, at three
points in a components life. These are the design stage, the manufacturing process, and the
service environment. In this part, we discuss aspects of the manufacturing process to monitor in
order to prevent fatigue.
The Manufacturing Process
Manufacturing processes are a rich, though unintended, source of stress concentrations from which
fatigue cracks can initiate. The list is almost endless, and includes rough machined surfaces from
dull tooling or excessive feeds and speeds, burrs from cutting or drilling operations, and insufficient
chamfers or corner radiuses. Mechanical fasteners bolts, screws, studs, and rivets- are highly
prone to fatigue failure. Prominent among these are thread laps, folds or seems, that are formed
when the threads are cut into the fastener. Threads formed by rolling are much less susceptible to
laps and consequent fatigue failure. Whether threads are cut or rolled, however, insufficient
tightening torque during the assembly stage of the manufacturing process is probably the number
one source of fatigue failure in fasteners.
Welds, even when technically faultless, provide geometric stress concentrations. Defective welds
and welding procedures may result in porosity and high hardness heat affected zones from which
fatigue can initiate. Similarly, braze and solder joints, by their very nature, typically produce a
geometric configuration that can potentially invite fatigue initiation. Fatigue susceptibility resulting
from these joining processes can be significantly mitigated by careful consideration in the design
stage, but design quality cannot compensate for weld and joining defects such as undercut, porosity
and slag inclusions.
Care in manufacturing and a good quality control program will avert many of these potential sources
of fatigue initiation. However, despite the best quality control program, the manufacturer is often at
the mercy of their raw material supplier. These suppliers may open the door to fatigue failure
through castings which contain excessive porosity or microstructural defects, mill products which
are work hardened, forgings with undetected laps or seams, or gross non-metallic inclusions in any
of these products. Appropriate specifications on outsourced stock and components are vital in
guaranteeing their quality, but as with so many aspects of production, they are a
compromise. Loose specs solicit low cost bids, but a potentially high percentage of defective
product, while tight specs limit the number of vendors capable of meeting them and drive costs
higher, cutting into profits.

Failure Analysis of Fatigue Part 5 Confronting
Fatigue Prevention in Service
Published on May 1, 2014 by Rob in News

Confronting Fatigue Attack and Defense
From a practical standpoint, fatigue failures present a danger to you, the manufacturer, at three
points in a components life. These are the design stage, the manufacturing process, and the
service environment. In this part, we discuss a few of the many factors that can initiate fatigue
failure in the service environment.
The Service Environment
Once a product leaves the factory you, the manufacturer, have lost control of the many factors that
can initiate a fatigue failure once it is placed in service. Abuse and inadequate maintenance are
leading preliminaries of failure by fatigue, as well as other failure modes. Failures of components or
assemblies up stream from your product may introduce higher loads than the product or
component was designed to sustain. Harsh service environments, such as road salts or ocean front
installations may instigate corrosive attack, with corrosion pits providing a fatigue initiation sight.
Analysis and identification of the root cause of fatigue failures in service is critical to educating your
customer in the appropriate use and maintenance of your product and getting them back on track
as a satisfied customer.
Identifying the root cause of service environment
initiated fatigue failures can be challenging, and sometimes obscure, as the following example
illustrates. Some years ago, we provided analytical support on a lawsuit which was filed after a
person sustained a back injury when the metal leg of a stacking chair fractured. Stacking chairs
are the type of institutional chairs you often see in school auditoriums and other public buildings and
are designed to be stacked, one upon the other, for more compact storage when not in use. This
particular chair came from a college in Ohio. Our analysis proved that low stress, high cycle fatigue
was the failure mode. In other words, low magnitude stresses applied at high frequencies, in this
case over a million cycles.
The chair had been in use for a relatively brief time, and even if it had seen longer service, it
seemed unlikely that it could have been subjected to the number of load cycles indicated by the
fracture morphology. This presented something of a mystery, as the failure mode was indisputable.
Investigation of the service environment revealed that the chairs were used sporadically and when
not in use, were stacked in a storeroom. The college staff was methodical in setting up the chairs in
orderly rows in an adjacent auditorium, then stacking them from the same end of the same rows
when they were no longer required, with the same chair ending up on the bottom of the stack before
going back into storage. The stack was higher than the maximum specified by the manufacturer,
providing a load in excess of the design limit. A survey of the area revealed that the storeroom was
immediately above the main HVAC installation, the final and key piece of the puzzle. Vibration from
the HVAC system, transmitted through the storeroom floor, and loads from the weight of chairs
stacked in excess of the design limit provided the stresses required to initiate the fatigue crack.
Once the crack grew to the point at which the remaining intact tubular leg could no longer sustain
the load of a sitting person, final fracture occurred.
As with all failure analyses, the analyst must provide specific answers to three critical questions
when evaluating a fatigue failure. They are: 1. How did it fail? 2. Why did it fail? and 3. What
will prevent future failures? If you have commissioned a failure analysis, and all three of these
questions are not answered, all you have paid for is some interesting pictures and a possible
lawsuit when your product fails again.

Microstructure Defect Analysis

Fastener microstructure analysis
Microstructure Heat Treatment Analysis
Metallurgical Associates (MAI) provides expert microstructure and heat treatment analysis. Our
engineers extensive experience, combined with the latest sample preparation capabilities and
techniques, identify defects or flaws, conformance to specification, and suitability of components for
intended application in service.
The physical properties of metals strength, hardness, wear resistance, etc. and their
performance in service depend to a large degree on their microstructure. The sample preparation
and analysis of microstructure is referred to as metallograpy.
Industrial metals are composed of crystalline structures. The size, shape, orientation and chemical
composition of these crystals, or grains, determine those properties. These characteristics are
modified by a variety of manufacturing processes including heat treating, welding, grinding, forging,
and others. Irregularities in these manufacturing processes may result in microstructural changes or
defects which severely degrade a parts performance.

Carbide defect analysis
Metallography and Microstructural Analysis applications include:
Evaluate case hardened and through hardened heat treated components for conformance
to specification.
Determine components heat treat processing including temperatures, time at temperature,
quench type, stress relieve, etc.
Identify microstructural flaws, defects resulting in component failure or deficient
performance.
Weld and welder certification. Analysis of weld defects and failures.
Characterized braze and solder joints and certify conformance to specification.
Analyze plating and coating defects. Characterize single and multi-layer plating and coating
adhesion, thickness and conformance to specification.

Microstructure defect failure analysis
Microstructural Analysis Examples
Heat Exchanger Tube
Micro-Chip Solder Joint
Case Hardened Bearing
Manganese Steel Gear
Aluminum Bronze Shaft
Plate Forging

Ferrite evaluation